QUOTE
Member of Civil Rights Panel Quits, Says It Should Be Closed
Conservative Cites Partisan Agendas
By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 16, 2005; Page A02
The longest-serving member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights abruptly resigned yesterday, saying that the agency spends money irresponsibly in pursuit of partisan agendas -- liberal and conservative -- and should be shut down.
Russell G. Redenbaugh, a conservative unaffiliated with either major party, said he decided to end his 15-year tenure on the commission because his colleagues have resisted calls for more than a decade to appoint an independent agent to manage the commission's funds and an independent auditor to review its operations. The commission has not had a financial audit in 12 years; board and staff members believe it is deeply in the red.
The commission will likely be forced to reduce staff and close offices, Redenbaugh said. A House subcommittee is preparing to review the commission's finances at a hearing Thursday.
Redenbaugh's resignation came only months after the commission moved from a liberal to a conservative majority, and followed years of conflict under the leadership of Mary Frances Berry. Berry and liberal co-chairman Cruz Reynoso were ousted in December by President Bush, who appointed conservative Republican Gerald A. Reynolds to succeed Berry.
The commission is poised to press what some civil rights advocates, some academics and the two remaining liberal board members call a Republican agenda. On Friday, the board is scheduled to consider launching studies on whether Social Security shortchanges African Americans and whether minorities and women deserve advantages in the awarding of federal contracts. Both issues are part of Bush's agenda.
The commission's staff relied on research by the conservative Heritage Foundation and the libertarian Cato Institute to shape the proposal for the study.
Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, an umbrella group, predicted that "in each of these studies, I can assure you that they are going to reflect the right's ideology. It confirms our worst fears that the commission is little more than a handmaiden for the far right."
Reynolds said the Social Security study has nothing to do with partisan politics. "I want to see if the current [Social Security] system has a disparate impact on racial minorities," he said. "I don't know where the truth is, and that's the whole point of the exercise."
The commission was established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1957 to investigate denials of civil rights, but in recent years it has become a forum for partisan wrangling.
In 1980, Chairman Clarence Pendleton used his position to condemn affirmative action for African Americans and Hispanics, as well as equal rights for women. President Ronald Reagan unsuccessfully sought to remove several liberal commissioners who criticized Pendleton, including Berry, who in turn agitated against conservatives when she became chairman under President Bill Clinton.
Reynolds said leaders of traditional civil rights organizations, such as Henderson, "would have a negative reaction to whatever we do, no matter the subject." He said Berry's departure has solidified opposition to the new, more conservative commission.
"It comes down to a matter of trust," Reynolds said. "They don't trust us, but they trusted anything Mary Frances Berry did. My prediction is, whatever we do, there would be concern expressed."
But Redenbaugh's criticism is another matter. "It's a loss to the commission," Reynolds said. "I had the highest regard for him. I understand his frustration. But, at the same time, we've been at this for four months. It took decades for us to get where we are, and it will take more than four months to get out of it."
Commissioner Peter N. Kirsanow, another conservative who last month co-authored with Redenbaugh a request for financial reform at the commission, said he was sad to learn about his colleague's departure.
"Russell Redenbaugh is a bright guy who has twice the IQ I have," Kirsanow said. But he disagrees with Redenbaugh's assertion that a majority of commissioners will not support financial reform.
"The financial crisis has been discussed in the January and February meetings," he said. "This Friday, we plan to have a discussion on how to implement these reforms."
But Redenbaugh, a management consultant in Philadelphia, said he is dismayed that the commission did not commit its entire meeting to discussing the finances that staff director Kenneth L. Marcus has described as "a very difficult challenge." He said the planned discussion on Social Security, federal contracts and race in schools is premature and appears to follow years of partisan pursuits.
In his resignation letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Redenbaugh said that he "endured excessive partisanship" under Berry, the ousted liberal chairman, and that he "railed against slanted reports and exposed the commission's unaccountability to the taxpayer. I remained on the commission often in dissent, but always committed to reform."
"Unfortunately, chronic mismanagement and a fatally flawed organizational structure eliminates the commission's institutional capacity to even participate in" a discussion about reform, Redenbaugh said in his letter. "The commission, once the nation's conscience, is now a national embarrassment beyond repair."
To his surprise, Redenbaugh said in an interview yesterday, the commissioners seemed no more willing to implement financial reforms after the board changed from liberal to conservative hands at the beginning of the year.
Reynolds declined to say how the proposals for the studies came up for review and who supports them. His co-chairman, Abigail Thernstrom, said the study of federal contracts was proposed before Berry left, but she could not recall how the others came about.
The commission's two liberals, Elsie M. Meeks and Michael Yaki, said they were not part of those talks. Yaki, who was appointed by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) a few weeks ago, said he asked who broached the ideas but received no answer.
Henderson, Yaki and others who are generally opposed to Social Security changes say they are concerned about the commission's reliance on the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute.
The groups' research supports Bush's contention that Social Security shortchanges African Americans because their life spans are shorter than those of white beneficiaries. That assertion was roundly condemned by AARP and the NAACP.
Yaki wondered how the commission could analyze the restructuring of Social Security when the president has yet to offer a plan. "The project scope itself seems biased to give a result that will provide cover for the administration's current efforts to privatize Social Security," he said.
Thernstrom said the conclusions of studies undertaken by the board should be impartial.
"If I have my way, whatever's generated by the commission, you won't be able to put a Republican or Democrat label on them," she said.
Conservative Cites Partisan Agendas
By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 16, 2005; Page A02
The longest-serving member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights abruptly resigned yesterday, saying that the agency spends money irresponsibly in pursuit of partisan agendas -- liberal and conservative -- and should be shut down.
Russell G. Redenbaugh, a conservative unaffiliated with either major party, said he decided to end his 15-year tenure on the commission because his colleagues have resisted calls for more than a decade to appoint an independent agent to manage the commission's funds and an independent auditor to review its operations. The commission has not had a financial audit in 12 years; board and staff members believe it is deeply in the red.
The commission will likely be forced to reduce staff and close offices, Redenbaugh said. A House subcommittee is preparing to review the commission's finances at a hearing Thursday.
Redenbaugh's resignation came only months after the commission moved from a liberal to a conservative majority, and followed years of conflict under the leadership of Mary Frances Berry. Berry and liberal co-chairman Cruz Reynoso were ousted in December by President Bush, who appointed conservative Republican Gerald A. Reynolds to succeed Berry.
The commission is poised to press what some civil rights advocates, some academics and the two remaining liberal board members call a Republican agenda. On Friday, the board is scheduled to consider launching studies on whether Social Security shortchanges African Americans and whether minorities and women deserve advantages in the awarding of federal contracts. Both issues are part of Bush's agenda.
The commission's staff relied on research by the conservative Heritage Foundation and the libertarian Cato Institute to shape the proposal for the study.
Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, an umbrella group, predicted that "in each of these studies, I can assure you that they are going to reflect the right's ideology. It confirms our worst fears that the commission is little more than a handmaiden for the far right."
Reynolds said the Social Security study has nothing to do with partisan politics. "I want to see if the current [Social Security] system has a disparate impact on racial minorities," he said. "I don't know where the truth is, and that's the whole point of the exercise."
The commission was established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1957 to investigate denials of civil rights, but in recent years it has become a forum for partisan wrangling.
In 1980, Chairman Clarence Pendleton used his position to condemn affirmative action for African Americans and Hispanics, as well as equal rights for women. President Ronald Reagan unsuccessfully sought to remove several liberal commissioners who criticized Pendleton, including Berry, who in turn agitated against conservatives when she became chairman under President Bill Clinton.
Reynolds said leaders of traditional civil rights organizations, such as Henderson, "would have a negative reaction to whatever we do, no matter the subject." He said Berry's departure has solidified opposition to the new, more conservative commission.
"It comes down to a matter of trust," Reynolds said. "They don't trust us, but they trusted anything Mary Frances Berry did. My prediction is, whatever we do, there would be concern expressed."
But Redenbaugh's criticism is another matter. "It's a loss to the commission," Reynolds said. "I had the highest regard for him. I understand his frustration. But, at the same time, we've been at this for four months. It took decades for us to get where we are, and it will take more than four months to get out of it."
Commissioner Peter N. Kirsanow, another conservative who last month co-authored with Redenbaugh a request for financial reform at the commission, said he was sad to learn about his colleague's departure.
"Russell Redenbaugh is a bright guy who has twice the IQ I have," Kirsanow said. But he disagrees with Redenbaugh's assertion that a majority of commissioners will not support financial reform.
"The financial crisis has been discussed in the January and February meetings," he said. "This Friday, we plan to have a discussion on how to implement these reforms."
But Redenbaugh, a management consultant in Philadelphia, said he is dismayed that the commission did not commit its entire meeting to discussing the finances that staff director Kenneth L. Marcus has described as "a very difficult challenge." He said the planned discussion on Social Security, federal contracts and race in schools is premature and appears to follow years of partisan pursuits.
In his resignation letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Redenbaugh said that he "endured excessive partisanship" under Berry, the ousted liberal chairman, and that he "railed against slanted reports and exposed the commission's unaccountability to the taxpayer. I remained on the commission often in dissent, but always committed to reform."
"Unfortunately, chronic mismanagement and a fatally flawed organizational structure eliminates the commission's institutional capacity to even participate in" a discussion about reform, Redenbaugh said in his letter. "The commission, once the nation's conscience, is now a national embarrassment beyond repair."
To his surprise, Redenbaugh said in an interview yesterday, the commissioners seemed no more willing to implement financial reforms after the board changed from liberal to conservative hands at the beginning of the year.
Reynolds declined to say how the proposals for the studies came up for review and who supports them. His co-chairman, Abigail Thernstrom, said the study of federal contracts was proposed before Berry left, but she could not recall how the others came about.
The commission's two liberals, Elsie M. Meeks and Michael Yaki, said they were not part of those talks. Yaki, who was appointed by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) a few weeks ago, said he asked who broached the ideas but received no answer.
Henderson, Yaki and others who are generally opposed to Social Security changes say they are concerned about the commission's reliance on the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute.
The groups' research supports Bush's contention that Social Security shortchanges African Americans because their life spans are shorter than those of white beneficiaries. That assertion was roundly condemned by AARP and the NAACP.
Yaki wondered how the commission could analyze the restructuring of Social Security when the president has yet to offer a plan. "The project scope itself seems biased to give a result that will provide cover for the administration's current efforts to privatize Social Security," he said.
Thernstrom said the conclusions of studies undertaken by the board should be impartial.
"If I have my way, whatever's generated by the commission, you won't be able to put a Republican or Democrat label on them," she said.